Pacific Ocean AquaFarms Environmental Impact Statement, 55667-55670 [2020-19921]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices
via GoToMeeting, the meeting will
continue via Google Meet.
By Google Meet on Sept. 25, 2020, 9
a.m., follow this link:
https://calendar.google.com/calendar/r/
eventedit/copy/
NDdzYXU5OWdrMDZsZzJnNmJlMW1
pczVlbzQgbWlndWVsYXIyOUBt/
bWlndWVsYXIyOUBnbWFpbC5jb20
?pli=1&sf=true
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Miguel Rolo´n, Executive Director,
Caribbean Fishery Management Council,
270 Mun˜oz Rivera Avenue, Suite 401,
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918–1903,
telephone: (787) 398–3717.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
following items included in the
tentative agenda will be discussed:
Tentative Agenda
9 a.m.–12 p.m.—Five-Year Strategic
Plan—Dr. Michelle Duval
12 p.m.–1 p.m.—Lunch Break
1 p.m.–2:30 p.m.—Executive Order on
Promoting American Seafood
Competitiveness and Economic
Growth (May 7, 2020)
2:30 p.m.–2:45 p.m.—Other Business
2:45 p.m.–3 p.m.—5-minutes Public
Comments/Presentations
The CFMC is interested in hearing
feedback on priorities for its Five-Year
Strategic Plan (Sept. 25, 2020, 9 a.m.).
The list of topics the Council is
considering in developing the Strategic
Plan, and on which the Council would
like feedback include: (1) Resource
Health: Invasive species, climate
change, erosion & sedimentation, coastal
development, natural disasters, habitat
loss & destruction, enforcement,
pollution, bycatch & discard mortality,
abundance of baitfish and forage
species, lack of biological or ecosystem
information, overfishing, and illegal
fishing; (2) Social, Cultural, Economic
Concerns: closed seasons and stock
assessment, valuation and assessment of
area closures, increasing costs,
competition with foreign fishermen,
recreational & commercial user
conflicts, displacement of fishing
communities, and ability to support a
family, illegal/unlicensed commercial
fishers, lack of new entrants into
fishery, lack of social & economic data,
excess gear, market instability,
infrastructure needs (landing sites),
inadequate enforcement, excess fishing
capacity; (3) Management & Operational
Issues: accurate/timely commercial and
recreational catch data, enforcement of
existing regulations, fisher involvement
in data collection, regulatory
consistency (federal & territorial), clear
management objectives, bycatch/
regulatory discards, gear limits, cost-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Sep 08, 2020
Jkt 250001
effective data collection technology,
balancing commercial & recreational
concerns, incorporation of climate
change into management, Federal
permit program, and territorial licensing
requirements; and (4) Communication
and Outreach: frequency of
communication (alerts/reminders of
scoping meetings and council meetings),
variety of tools used in communication
(e.g. email, website, social media, paper,
text message alerts), educational
resources (e.g. science & stock
assessment, business planning,
restaurant choices, etc.), improving
general public awareness of fisheries
issues, regular in-person outreach
workshops on important topics, and
clarity and simplicity of presentations.
The order of business may be adjusted
as necessary to accommodate the
completion of agenda items. Other than
the start time, interested parties should
be aware that discussions may start
earlier or later than indicated, at the
discretion of the Chair.
Special Accommodations
Simultaneous interpretation will be
provided. To receive interpretation in
Spanish you can dial into the meeting
as follows:
US/Canada: call +1–888–947–3988,
when system answers, enter 1*999996#.
Para interpretacio´n en ingle´s marcar:
US/Canada: call +1–888–947–3988,
cuando el sistema conteste, entrar el
siguiente nu´mero 2*999996#.
For any additional information on this
public virtual meeting, please contact
Diana Martino, Caribbean Fishery
Management Council, 270 Mun˜oz
Rivera Avenue, Suite 401, San Juan,
Puerto Rico, 00918–1903, telephone:
(787) 226–8849.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: September 3, 2020.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–19909 Filed 9–8–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XA402]
Pacific Ocean AquaFarms
Environmental Impact Statement
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55667
Notice of intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement;
request for comments.
ACTION:
NOAA is publishing this
Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the proposed development of a
commercial-scale finfish aquaculture
facility to be located in Federal waters
off the coast of southern California. The
proposed facility would require two
Federal permits: A Section 402 Clean
Water Act (CWA) permit, and a Section
10 Rivers and Harbor Act (RHA) permit,
over which the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE),
respectively, have authority. The EPA
and USACE will act as cooperating
agencies for purposes of this EIS. This
NOI initiates the public scoping process
for the EIS during which time interested
parties are invited to provide comments
on the proposed project, its potential to
effect the human environment, means
for avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating
those effects, the preliminary reasonable
range of alternatives, and any additional
reasonable alternatives that should be
considered.
SUMMARY:
Written comments on the scope
of the analysis to be considered in the
draft EIS must be submitted no later
than October 26, 2020.
Two public meetings (in webinar
format) are scheduled for October 14,
2020 at 3 p.m.–5 p.m. Pacific Daylight
Time and October 16, 2020 at 1 p.m.–
3 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2020–0117, by using the Federal
e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov and enter NOAA–
NMFS–2020–0117. Click the ‘‘Comment
Now!’’ icon, complete the required
fields, and enter or attach your
comments.
Comments sent by any other method,
to any other address or individual, or
received after the end of the comment
period, may not be considered by
NOAA. All comments received are a
part of the public record and will
generally be posted for public viewing
on www.regulations.gov without change.
All personal identifying information
(e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential
business information, or otherwise
sensitive information submitted
voluntarily by the sender will be
publicly accessible. NOAA will accept
anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in
the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous).
The webinar link for October 14 and
16, 2020, is https://bit.ly/34sj1UT. You
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
55668
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices
may also participate by phone toll-free
at 844–621–3956 with access code: 146
738 1449.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Leathery, National NEPA
Coordinator, NMFS; phone: 301–427–
8013; email: poa.eis@noaa.gov; or
website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/aquaculture/pacific-oceanaquafarms-environmental-impactstatement.
As
required by the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), the EIS will analyze
the environmental consequences of
implementing each of the alternatives, if
carried forward for full review following
public scoping, by assessing the direct,
indirect, and cumulative effects of each
alternative on the human environment.
This EIS will be prepared in accordance
with the requirements of NEPA and
implementing regulations published by
the Council on Environmental Quality
in 1978, and amended in 1986 and 2005
(40 CFR parts 1500–1508).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Pacific Ocean AquaFarms (POA), the
applicant, proposes to construct,
operate, and maintain an offshore
marine finfish aquaculture operation
comprised of floating surface pens in
Federal waters located approximately 4
nautical miles (7.4 kilometers) off the
coast of San Diego, California. To
identify a site for the proposed action,
POA sought spatial analysis expertise
from the NOAA National Ocean Service
(NOS) to identify potential offshore
locations that would be technically and
commercially feasible while minimizing
environmental effects. The technical
and commercial parameters for the
proposed project were established by
the applicant to identify potential sites.
Those parameters included, but were
not limited to the following:
• Within 35 nautical miles (65
kilometers) of suitable port(s);
• Minimum and Maximum Depth to
Seafloor: ≥ 100 feet (30 meters) and <
495 feet (150 meters);
• Suitability for Species: California
yellowtail (Seriola dorsalis)—(other
native or naturalized species may also
be cultivated that have the same
requirements for temperature, space,
and other fixed parameters); and
• Gear Type: Submersible net pen.
The NOS siting analysis included
review of other engineering,
development, and environmental
constraints, including but not limited to
presence of submarine cables, oil and
gas infrastructure or leases, squid and
trawl fisheries, wastewater treatment
discharge structures, shipping lanes and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Sep 08, 2020
Jkt 250001
high vessel traffic areas, marine
protected areas, deep sea corals and
hard bottom habitat, and marine
mammal migration routes. The siting
analysis included a review by the U.S.
Department of Defense (DoD) to ensure
that potential sites avoided areas of DoD
operations in Federal waters, which are
extensive offshore of southern
California.
POA and NOS identified a site that
best meets the technical, commercial,
and environmental parameters within
an area located approximately 4 nautical
miles (7.4 kilometers) offshore of San
Diego, California. Following initial site
identification, POA coordinated with
local U.S. Navy commands and
organizational units and received
informal approval from the DoD.
NOAA has directives to preserve
ocean sustainability and facilitate
domestic aquaculture in the U.S.
consistent with the National
Aquaculture Act of 1980, the NOAA
Marine Aquaculture Policy (2011), and
Presidential Executive Order 13921—
‘‘Promoting American Seafood
Competitiveness and Economic
Growth’’ (May 7, 2020) through, among
other things, providing technical
expertise and supporting environmental
review and permitting of commercial
scale aquaculture proposals. NOAA may
also be called upon to engage in
consultations, permitting, and
authorization for such projects under
the Endangered Species Act, the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management
and Conservation Act, and the Marine
Mammal Protection Act.
Purpose and Need
The proposed Federal action includes
decisions on two permits under the
respective authorities of the EPA and
the USACE as required to site, install,
and operate the proposed aquaculture
facility. The EPA’s proposed Federal
action is the issuance, if appropriate, of
a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit,
which would authorize effluent
discharge from an aquatic animal
production facility because such
discharges are considered a point source
discharge into waters of the U.S. The
USACE’s proposed Federal action is the
issuance, if appropriate, of a permit
pursuant to Section 10 of the RHA that
authorizes structures and work in
navigable waters of the U.S.
Agency Purpose and Need
The EPA has authority to issue
NPDES permits pursuant to Section 402
of the CWA and regulations at 40 CFR
part 125, subpart M. Under Section 402,
all point sources that discharge directly
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
into U.S. waters are required to obtain
an NPDES permit from the EPA. Each
NPDES permit specifies effluent
limitations for particular pollutants, as
well as monitoring and reporting
requirements for the proposed
discharge. POA intends to apply for a
NPDES permit from the EPA. Because
the POA facility is proposed in Federal
waters, it requires a NPDES permit to
operate and the EPA will evaluate
POA’s permit application pursuant to
the CWA and implementing regulations.
The NPDES permit, if issued, would
authorize POA to discharge pollutants
into waters of the U.S. The EPA has a
statutory responsibility to respond to
applicant requests for NPDES permits.
EPA is required to review applications
and, if appropriate, issue NPDES
permits under the CWA.
The USACE has authority to issue
permits pursuant to Section 10 of the
RHA and regulations at 33 CFR parts
320–332. Prior authorization (a permit)
is required for installation of structures
and work in, over, or under navigable
waters of the U.S. This will require
evaluation of impacts to navigation and
public interests. The USACE’s proposed
Federal action is a direct outcome of
POA’s permit application to establish
and operate a commercial-scale finfish
facility in marine waters off the
southern California coast; thus, the
purpose of USACE’s action is to
evaluate POA’s application pursuant to
the RHA. The USACE has a statutory
responsibility to respond to applicant
requests for Section 10 permits. USACE
is required to review applications and,
if appropriate, issue permits under
Section 10 of the RHA.
Applicant Purpose and Need
The applicant’s stated purpose of the
proposed project is to construct and
operate a new commercial-scale,
offshore finfish aquaculture facility in
the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
off the southern California coast.
The United Nations estimates that the
world population will reach
approximately 9.7 billion people by the
year 2050, and approximately 11.0
billion people by the year 2100. With
this approximate 26 to 43 percent
growth in population, the demand for
food (and protein) will also grow
proportionally. Terrestrial meat
production cannot support this demand
without significant land use and
environmental consequences.
The U.S. has the world’s largest EEZ
including a wide range of habitats and
farmable species with the resultant
potential to support large stocks of wild
fish species and extensive offshore
aquaculture operations to provide
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices
additional protein sources for the U.S.
and exports. However, many wild
fisheries within the EEZ are at, or near,
maximum sustainable yield and the U.S.
is one of the world’s largest importers of
fish and fishery products. By weight,
greater than 85 percent of the seafood
Americans eat comes from abroad, over
half of it from aquaculture. The U.S. is
ranked 17th in the world for
aquaculture production as of 2018,
contributing to an annual $16.8 billion
seafood industry trade deficit.
By operating in U.S. waters, POA
would be under U.S. regulatory
oversight. Data generated and collected
from the aquaculture facility could
provide multiple benefits to government
agencies, universities, fisheries
managers, and the scientific community.
Such a commercial-scale, offshore
aquaculture facility would provide an
opportunity for study, new technology
development, and transferable
knowledge and would be the first of its
kind in California waters.
Preliminary Reasonable Range of
Alternatives for Consideration
NOAA has identified a proposed
action and preliminary alternatives for
potential consideration in the draft EIS.
Both a no-action and several
preliminary action alternatives are
presented for consideration for public
review and comment. NOAA is also
soliciting additional alternatives for
consideration.
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the
EPA and USACE would not issue
permits and the applicant would not be
authorized to construct or operate a
finfish aquaculture facility offshore of
southern California; and the project’s
direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts
would not occur. Under the no-action
alternative, the proposed project would
not take place, however the resulting
environmental effects of no action
would be compared with the effects of
allowing the proposed project or an
alternate project to go forward.
Reasonable Range of Action
Alternatives
Action alternatives describe potential
alternative approaches to achieve the
defined purpose and need of the
proposed action. NOAA is considering
the following action alternatives at this
time: The San Diego Site Alternative
(applicant’s proposed action), Long
Beach Site Alternative, and Half-Scale
Alternative at either location.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Sep 08, 2020
Jkt 250001
San Diego Site Alternative
POA proposes to construct and
operate a new commercial-scale,
offshore source of finfish in the U.S.
EEZ approximately 4 nautical miles (7.4
kilometers) off the coast of San Diego.
An area of approximately 1,000 acres (4
square kilometers) (exact area to be
determined based on engineering
design) is sited as suitable for potential
use; of this, approximately 717 acres
(2.9 square kilometers) would be
occupied by the project, including a
total of 28 submersible pens, anchors
and mooring lines, and surface marker
buoys. The total area may change
relative to the exact location of the pen
grids, the relative depth of the pens, and
the final engineering requirements that
would delineate the location, number,
and depth of mooring lines. Initial
production is projected to yield 2.2
million pounds (1,000 metric tons)
annually growing up to 11 million
pounds (5,000 metric tons) after
environmental monitoring confirms that
each successive scale of expansion has
not resulted in any substantial
environmental or space-use impacts.
California yellowtail (Seriola dorsalis)
would be the initial cultivated species,
as it is native to California waters. Other
local species such as white seabass
(Atractoscion nobilis), may be grown in
addition to or in lieu of California
yellowtail when the project has become
operational under Federal and state
permit requirements.
The project would utilize established
and tested pen and mooring
technologies that are able to withstand
storm and rough sea conditions. The
POA pen culture system would be
constructed of high density polyethylene pipe with a suspended copperalloy mesh to control for fouling
organisms and inhibit parasitic
infestations. The pens would have an
approximately 98.4-foot (30-meter)
diameter and 46-foot (14-meter) depth.
The mooring system would be designed
with 2 pen grids, each containing 2 rows
of 7 pens (28 pens total) with grid cell
dimensions of 328 feet by 328 feet (100
meters by 100 meters). The mooring
system would be made of nylon ropes,
galvanized steel shackles, and buoys
(surface and subsurface) located at
nodes in the grid. Steel chains and
anchors or concrete blocks would secure
the system to the ocean floor.
Once all applicable permits are
obtained, construction of the
aquaculture facilities will take
approximately 1 year. Stocking of the
cages would then occur sometime
within the following year with the first
commercial harvest occurring 18 to 24
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55669
months later. POA would scale up
production after initial yields are
reached and subject to environmental
monitoring. The anticipated maximum
production up to 11 million pounds
(5,000 metric tons) per year would occur
approximately 3 to 6 years after the
project is constructed.
Once operational, the aquaculture
facility would follow Best Aquaculture
Practices set forth by the Aquaculture
Stewardship Council (in collaboration
with the World Wildlife Foundation)
and the Global Aquaculture Alliance.
The applicant has proposed to only
work with feed suppliers and processing
facilities that are Best Aquaculture
Practices certified.
Dedicated vessels would haul feed,
personnel, and harvested fish to and
from the aquaculture facility daily from
the Port of San Diego. The vessels
would include an offshore feeding
system, harvest vessel, multiuse vessel,
and a personnel transport vessel. A
dedicated harvest vessel would visit the
aquaculture facility site at least three
times per week at full production to
remove fish from the net pens. Actual
frequency of use would depend on time
of year and harvesting schedule as
determined by fish growth and
aquaculture facility need.
Landside facilities would include
existing facilities and infrastructure at
the Port of San Diego. Pier or wharf
access would be needed for construction
staging and preparation and loading and
unloading of feed and harvested fish;
occasional access would also be needed
to transport juvenile fish to the
aquaculture facility, and to
accommodate vessel docking or mooring
capacity for multiple vessels of various
lengths.
Long Beach Site Alternative
This action alternative would
construct and operate the POA
aquaculture grid arrays offshore at
approximately 4 nautical miles (7.4
kilometers) southwest of Sunset Beach
in Long Beach. The Long Beach site has
not been analyzed by the DoD to receive
informal clearance. However, the
analysis conducted by NOS included
review of DoD spatial data regarding
operating areas, ocean disposal areas,
unexploded ordnances, danger zones,
and restricted areas and adequate
surface and seafloor space was
identified that avoided these areas.
Onshore facilities needed for this
alternative would be similar to those
identified for the proposed action, but
would be expected to be located within
existing developed areas at the Port of
Long Beach or the Port of Los Angeles.
Aside from the different site location,
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
55670
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices
this alternative would be of similar size
at full build-out, would use the same net
pen design, anchoring design, phased
development, and operational plans as
the San Diego Site Alternative.
Half-Scale Alternative
This action alternative would
consider an initial projected production
of 2.2 million pounds (1,000 metric
tons) and a final production of 5.5
million pounds (2,500 metric tons) from
3 to 6 years after the project is
constructed and operated. This
production level and project spatial
extent would be approximately half that
described in the San Diego Site
Alternative. The anchoring and mooring
system for a single submerged grid
would use the same engineering design
as the full-scale San Diego Site
Alternative. Only 1 pen grid containing
2 rows of 7 pens (14 pens total) would
be installed. The half-scale alternative
would be analyzed for both the San
Diego and Long Beach Alternative sites.
Action Alternatives Summary
Currently, two location alternatives
and a half-scale alternative are being
considered for detailed analysis in the
EIS. The two location alternatives in
southern California—San Diego and
Long Beach—are considered for the offshore finfish aquaculture site and the
landside facilities that would be used to
receive, process, and distribute the
harvested fish.
Dated: September 2, 2020.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–19921 Filed 9–8–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XA445]
New England Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; public meeting.
AGENCY:
The New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) is
scheduling a public meeting of its
Scallop Committee via webinar to
consider actions affecting New England
fisheries in the exclusive economic zone
(EEZ). Recommendations from this
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Sep 08, 2020
Jkt 250001
group will be brought to the full Council
for formal consideration and action, if
appropriate.
DATES: This meeting will be held on
Friday, September 25, 2020 at 8:30 a.m.
via webinar.
ADDRESSES: All meeting participants
and interested parties can register to
join the webinar at https://
attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/
3170442187257265423.
Council address: New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director,
New England Fishery Management
Council; telephone: (978) 465–0492.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Agenda
The Scallop Committee will discuss
Amendment 21, specifically, review of
public comments and select final
preferred alternatives. Amendment 21
includes measures related to: (1)
Management of the Northern Gulf of
Maine (NGOM) Management Area, (2)
Limited Access General Category
(LAGC) individual fishing quota (IFQ)
possession limits, and (3) ability of
Limited Access vessels with LAGC IFQ
to transfer quota to LAGC IFQ only
vessels. The committee will also discuss
2021/22 Specifications: Discuss the
timing and outlook for 2020 surveys and
2021/22 specifications process. They
also plan to review 2021 Priorities:
Discuss and rank potential 2021 scallop
work priorities.
Other business may be discussed, as
necessary.
Although non-emergency issues not
contained in this agenda may come
before this group for discussion, those
issues may not be the subject of formal
action during these meetings. Action
will be restricted to those issues
specifically listed in this notice and any
issues arising after publication of this
notice that require emergency action
under section 305(c) of the MagnusonStevens Act, provided the public has
been notified of the Council’s intent to
take final action to address the
emergency.
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at
(978) 465–0492, at least 5 days prior to
the meeting date. Consistent with 16
U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is
available upon request.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: September 3, 2020.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–19911 Filed 9–8–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Air Force
Air Force Scientific Advisory Board;
Notice of Federal Advisory Committee
Meeting
Air Force Scientific Advisory
Board, Department of the Air Force,
Department of Defense.
ACTION: Notice of federal advisory
committee meeting.
AGENCY:
The Department of Defense
(DoD) is publishing this notice to
announce that the following Federal
Advisory Committee meeting of the U.S.
Air Force Scientific Advisory Board will
take place.
DATES: Open to the public virtually.
September 15, 2020 from 3:00 p.m. to
4:10 p.m. EDT.
ADDRESSES: The virtual meeting can be
accessed at the following link: https://
us02web.zoom.us/j/85940304005
?pwd=SHR2cDg1SlZQWWt
lVjNGKzVUUGdNUT09.
Meeting ID: 859 4030 4005
Passcode: 421833
Find your local number: https://
us02web.zoom.us/u/kegecLgh9I.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lt
Col Elizabeth Sorrells, (321) 480–1009
(Voice), elizabeth.d.sorrells.mil@
mail.mil (Email). Mailing address is
1500 West Perimeter Road, Ste. #3300,
Joint Base Andrews, MD 20762.
Website: https://
www.scientificadvisoryboard.af.mil/.
The most up-to-date changes to the
meeting agenda can be found on the
website.
SUMMARY:
This
meeting is being held under the
provisions of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5
U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the
Government in the Sunshine Act of
1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and
41 CFR 102–3.140 and 102–3.150. Due
to circumstances beyond the control of
the Department of Defense and the
Designated Federal Officer for the U.S.
Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, the
U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory
Board was unable to provide public
notification required by 41 CFR 102–
3.150(a) concerning its September 15,
2020 meeting. Accordingly, the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM
09SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 175 (Wednesday, September 9, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55667-55670]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19921]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XA402]
Pacific Ocean AquaFarms Environmental Impact Statement
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement;
request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NOAA is publishing this Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed development of a
commercial-scale finfish aquaculture facility to be located in Federal
waters off the coast of southern California. The proposed facility
would require two Federal permits: A Section 402 Clean Water Act (CWA)
permit, and a Section 10 Rivers and Harbor Act (RHA) permit, over which
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE), respectively, have authority. The EPA and USACE will
act as cooperating agencies for purposes of this EIS. This NOI
initiates the public scoping process for the EIS during which time
interested parties are invited to provide comments on the proposed
project, its potential to effect the human environment, means for
avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating those effects, the preliminary
reasonable range of alternatives, and any additional reasonable
alternatives that should be considered.
DATES: Written comments on the scope of the analysis to be considered
in the draft EIS must be submitted no later than October 26, 2020.
Two public meetings (in webinar format) are scheduled for October
14, 2020 at 3 p.m.-5 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time and October 16, 2020 at
1 p.m.-3 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by
NOAA-NMFS-2020-0117, by using the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov and enter NOAA-NMFS-2020-0117. Click the ``Comment
Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your
comments.
Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be
considered by NOAA. All comments received are a part of the public
record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily
by the sender will be publicly accessible. NOAA will accept anonymous
comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous).
The webinar link for October 14 and 16, 2020, is https://bit.ly/34sj1UT. You
[[Page 55668]]
may also participate by phone toll-free at 844-621-3956 with access
code: 146 738 1449.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Leathery, National NEPA
Coordinator, NMFS; phone: 301-427-8013; email: [email protected]; or
website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/aquaculture/pacific-ocean-aquafarms-environmental-impact-statement.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As required by the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), the EIS will analyze the environmental consequences
of implementing each of the alternatives, if carried forward for full
review following public scoping, by assessing the direct, indirect, and
cumulative effects of each alternative on the human environment. This
EIS will be prepared in accordance with the requirements of NEPA and
implementing regulations published by the Council on Environmental
Quality in 1978, and amended in 1986 and 2005 (40 CFR parts 1500-1508).
Background
Pacific Ocean AquaFarms (POA), the applicant, proposes to
construct, operate, and maintain an offshore marine finfish aquaculture
operation comprised of floating surface pens in Federal waters located
approximately 4 nautical miles (7.4 kilometers) off the coast of San
Diego, California. To identify a site for the proposed action, POA
sought spatial analysis expertise from the NOAA National Ocean Service
(NOS) to identify potential offshore locations that would be
technically and commercially feasible while minimizing environmental
effects. The technical and commercial parameters for the proposed
project were established by the applicant to identify potential sites.
Those parameters included, but were not limited to the following:
Within 35 nautical miles (65 kilometers) of suitable
port(s);
Minimum and Maximum Depth to Seafloor: >= 100 feet (30
meters) and < 495 feet (150 meters);
Suitability for Species: California yellowtail (Seriola
dorsalis)--(other native or naturalized species may also be cultivated
that have the same requirements for temperature, space, and other fixed
parameters); and
Gear Type: Submersible net pen.
The NOS siting analysis included review of other engineering,
development, and environmental constraints, including but not limited
to presence of submarine cables, oil and gas infrastructure or leases,
squid and trawl fisheries, wastewater treatment discharge structures,
shipping lanes and high vessel traffic areas, marine protected areas,
deep sea corals and hard bottom habitat, and marine mammal migration
routes. The siting analysis included a review by the U.S. Department of
Defense (DoD) to ensure that potential sites avoided areas of DoD
operations in Federal waters, which are extensive offshore of southern
California.
POA and NOS identified a site that best meets the technical,
commercial, and environmental parameters within an area located
approximately 4 nautical miles (7.4 kilometers) offshore of San Diego,
California. Following initial site identification, POA coordinated with
local U.S. Navy commands and organizational units and received informal
approval from the DoD.
NOAA has directives to preserve ocean sustainability and facilitate
domestic aquaculture in the U.S. consistent with the National
Aquaculture Act of 1980, the NOAA Marine Aquaculture Policy (2011), and
Presidential Executive Order 13921--``Promoting American Seafood
Competitiveness and Economic Growth'' (May 7, 2020) through, among
other things, providing technical expertise and supporting
environmental review and permitting of commercial scale aquaculture
proposals. NOAA may also be called upon to engage in consultations,
permitting, and authorization for such projects under the Endangered
Species Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management and Conservation
Act, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
Purpose and Need
The proposed Federal action includes decisions on two permits under
the respective authorities of the EPA and the USACE as required to
site, install, and operate the proposed aquaculture facility. The EPA's
proposed Federal action is the issuance, if appropriate, of a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, which would
authorize effluent discharge from an aquatic animal production facility
because such discharges are considered a point source discharge into
waters of the U.S. The USACE's proposed Federal action is the issuance,
if appropriate, of a permit pursuant to Section 10 of the RHA that
authorizes structures and work in navigable waters of the U.S.
Agency Purpose and Need
The EPA has authority to issue NPDES permits pursuant to Section
402 of the CWA and regulations at 40 CFR part 125, subpart M. Under
Section 402, all point sources that discharge directly into U.S. waters
are required to obtain an NPDES permit from the EPA. Each NPDES permit
specifies effluent limitations for particular pollutants, as well as
monitoring and reporting requirements for the proposed discharge. POA
intends to apply for a NPDES permit from the EPA. Because the POA
facility is proposed in Federal waters, it requires a NPDES permit to
operate and the EPA will evaluate POA's permit application pursuant to
the CWA and implementing regulations. The NPDES permit, if issued,
would authorize POA to discharge pollutants into waters of the U.S. The
EPA has a statutory responsibility to respond to applicant requests for
NPDES permits. EPA is required to review applications and, if
appropriate, issue NPDES permits under the CWA.
The USACE has authority to issue permits pursuant to Section 10 of
the RHA and regulations at 33 CFR parts 320-332. Prior authorization (a
permit) is required for installation of structures and work in, over,
or under navigable waters of the U.S. This will require evaluation of
impacts to navigation and public interests. The USACE's proposed
Federal action is a direct outcome of POA's permit application to
establish and operate a commercial-scale finfish facility in marine
waters off the southern California coast; thus, the purpose of USACE's
action is to evaluate POA's application pursuant to the RHA. The USACE
has a statutory responsibility to respond to applicant requests for
Section 10 permits. USACE is required to review applications and, if
appropriate, issue permits under Section 10 of the RHA.
Applicant Purpose and Need
The applicant's stated purpose of the proposed project is to
construct and operate a new commercial-scale, offshore finfish
aquaculture facility in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) off the
southern California coast.
The United Nations estimates that the world population will reach
approximately 9.7 billion people by the year 2050, and approximately
11.0 billion people by the year 2100. With this approximate 26 to 43
percent growth in population, the demand for food (and protein) will
also grow proportionally. Terrestrial meat production cannot support
this demand without significant land use and environmental
consequences.
The U.S. has the world's largest EEZ including a wide range of
habitats and farmable species with the resultant potential to support
large stocks of wild fish species and extensive offshore aquaculture
operations to provide
[[Page 55669]]
additional protein sources for the U.S. and exports. However, many wild
fisheries within the EEZ are at, or near, maximum sustainable yield and
the U.S. is one of the world's largest importers of fish and fishery
products. By weight, greater than 85 percent of the seafood Americans
eat comes from abroad, over half of it from aquaculture. The U.S. is
ranked 17th in the world for aquaculture production as of 2018,
contributing to an annual $16.8 billion seafood industry trade deficit.
By operating in U.S. waters, POA would be under U.S. regulatory
oversight. Data generated and collected from the aquaculture facility
could provide multiple benefits to government agencies, universities,
fisheries managers, and the scientific community. Such a commercial-
scale, offshore aquaculture facility would provide an opportunity for
study, new technology development, and transferable knowledge and would
be the first of its kind in California waters.
Preliminary Reasonable Range of Alternatives for Consideration
NOAA has identified a proposed action and preliminary alternatives
for potential consideration in the draft EIS. Both a no-action and
several preliminary action alternatives are presented for consideration
for public review and comment. NOAA is also soliciting additional
alternatives for consideration.
No-Action Alternative
Under the no-action alternative, the EPA and USACE would not issue
permits and the applicant would not be authorized to construct or
operate a finfish aquaculture facility offshore of southern California;
and the project's direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts would not
occur. Under the no-action alternative, the proposed project would not
take place, however the resulting environmental effects of no action
would be compared with the effects of allowing the proposed project or
an alternate project to go forward.
Reasonable Range of Action Alternatives
Action alternatives describe potential alternative approaches to
achieve the defined purpose and need of the proposed action. NOAA is
considering the following action alternatives at this time: The San
Diego Site Alternative (applicant's proposed action), Long Beach Site
Alternative, and Half-Scale Alternative at either location.
San Diego Site Alternative
POA proposes to construct and operate a new commercial-scale,
offshore source of finfish in the U.S. EEZ approximately 4 nautical
miles (7.4 kilometers) off the coast of San Diego. An area of
approximately 1,000 acres (4 square kilometers) (exact area to be
determined based on engineering design) is sited as suitable for
potential use; of this, approximately 717 acres (2.9 square kilometers)
would be occupied by the project, including a total of 28 submersible
pens, anchors and mooring lines, and surface marker buoys. The total
area may change relative to the exact location of the pen grids, the
relative depth of the pens, and the final engineering requirements that
would delineate the location, number, and depth of mooring lines.
Initial production is projected to yield 2.2 million pounds (1,000
metric tons) annually growing up to 11 million pounds (5,000 metric
tons) after environmental monitoring confirms that each successive
scale of expansion has not resulted in any substantial environmental or
space-use impacts. California yellowtail (Seriola dorsalis) would be
the initial cultivated species, as it is native to California waters.
Other local species such as white seabass (Atractoscion nobilis), may
be grown in addition to or in lieu of California yellowtail when the
project has become operational under Federal and state permit
requirements.
The project would utilize established and tested pen and mooring
technologies that are able to withstand storm and rough sea conditions.
The POA pen culture system would be constructed of high density poly-
ethylene pipe with a suspended copper-alloy mesh to control for fouling
organisms and inhibit parasitic infestations. The pens would have an
approximately 98.4-foot (30-meter) diameter and 46-foot (14-meter)
depth. The mooring system would be designed with 2 pen grids, each
containing 2 rows of 7 pens (28 pens total) with grid cell dimensions
of 328 feet by 328 feet (100 meters by 100 meters). The mooring system
would be made of nylon ropes, galvanized steel shackles, and buoys
(surface and subsurface) located at nodes in the grid. Steel chains and
anchors or concrete blocks would secure the system to the ocean floor.
Once all applicable permits are obtained, construction of the
aquaculture facilities will take approximately 1 year. Stocking of the
cages would then occur sometime within the following year with the
first commercial harvest occurring 18 to 24 months later. POA would
scale up production after initial yields are reached and subject to
environmental monitoring. The anticipated maximum production up to 11
million pounds (5,000 metric tons) per year would occur approximately 3
to 6 years after the project is constructed.
Once operational, the aquaculture facility would follow Best
Aquaculture Practices set forth by the Aquaculture Stewardship Council
(in collaboration with the World Wildlife Foundation) and the Global
Aquaculture Alliance. The applicant has proposed to only work with feed
suppliers and processing facilities that are Best Aquaculture Practices
certified.
Dedicated vessels would haul feed, personnel, and harvested fish to
and from the aquaculture facility daily from the Port of San Diego. The
vessels would include an offshore feeding system, harvest vessel,
multiuse vessel, and a personnel transport vessel. A dedicated harvest
vessel would visit the aquaculture facility site at least three times
per week at full production to remove fish from the net pens. Actual
frequency of use would depend on time of year and harvesting schedule
as determined by fish growth and aquaculture facility need.
Landside facilities would include existing facilities and
infrastructure at the Port of San Diego. Pier or wharf access would be
needed for construction staging and preparation and loading and
unloading of feed and harvested fish; occasional access would also be
needed to transport juvenile fish to the aquaculture facility, and to
accommodate vessel docking or mooring capacity for multiple vessels of
various lengths.
Long Beach Site Alternative
This action alternative would construct and operate the POA
aquaculture grid arrays offshore at approximately 4 nautical miles (7.4
kilometers) southwest of Sunset Beach in Long Beach. The Long Beach
site has not been analyzed by the DoD to receive informal clearance.
However, the analysis conducted by NOS included review of DoD spatial
data regarding operating areas, ocean disposal areas, unexploded
ordnances, danger zones, and restricted areas and adequate surface and
seafloor space was identified that avoided these areas. Onshore
facilities needed for this alternative would be similar to those
identified for the proposed action, but would be expected to be located
within existing developed areas at the Port of Long Beach or the Port
of Los Angeles. Aside from the different site location,
[[Page 55670]]
this alternative would be of similar size at full build-out, would use
the same net pen design, anchoring design, phased development, and
operational plans as the San Diego Site Alternative.
Half-Scale Alternative
This action alternative would consider an initial projected
production of 2.2 million pounds (1,000 metric tons) and a final
production of 5.5 million pounds (2,500 metric tons) from 3 to 6 years
after the project is constructed and operated. This production level
and project spatial extent would be approximately half that described
in the San Diego Site Alternative. The anchoring and mooring system for
a single submerged grid would use the same engineering design as the
full-scale San Diego Site Alternative. Only 1 pen grid containing 2
rows of 7 pens (14 pens total) would be installed. The half-scale
alternative would be analyzed for both the San Diego and Long Beach
Alternative sites.
Action Alternatives Summary
Currently, two location alternatives and a half-scale alternative
are being considered for detailed analysis in the EIS. The two location
alternatives in southern California--San Diego and Long Beach--are
considered for the off-shore finfish aquaculture site and the landside
facilities that would be used to receive, process, and distribute the
harvested fish.
Dated: September 2, 2020.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-19921 Filed 9-8-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
